Bowline as an endline knot

[ QUOTE ]


ah duh!

Its acceptable only where a cinching knot is knot needed, EI- a captive eye biner. The reason for a cinching knot is to keep biners from potentially crossloading. Not an issue with a captive eye is it? Is it THE BEST knot for use with a captive eye? IMO no, but it is acceptable.

Do you comprehend now? your holy Ekkaniss.

[/ QUOTE ]

You've just been punk'd! Thanks for the lesson though.
 
[ QUOTE ]
bowline without being tail tied no-no..I used to use it until it came untied from slacking etc...

[/ QUOTE ]

Tail tied!? wtf!

The bowline if tied, dressed and set properly and used with half decent climbing line will never become slack. I have never in the last 40 years of climbing had a bowline come slack.
 
wow grover, are an anchor hitch and a buntline hitch really so complicated that they may cause your death if you were to use them? they dont seem all that difficult. side loading the g\caribiner aside, it seems that a bowline to a carabiner would just be plain bulky and sloppy. its all opinion i suppose. If I ever tie in straight to my rings which I often do when double crotching I will use a bowline.
 
I remember when Arborplex first came out. Back in the early 80's. Correct me if I'm wrong there, But it was cheap, and up to standard in strength requirements. Though Arborplex is seriously springy line. Slack, loading, working, Arborplex is notorious for knots slacking, slipping and.... You have to really set the knot with that stuff.

The more supple ropes today don't have the springy tendency of arborplex and for it hold their knots far better.

The bowline is a superior knot that is quick and easy to tie. With the proper attention paid when setting the bowline it is a very safe termination knot.

However, no knot is idiot proof.
 
Any knot 'could' be used for a termination, you choose.

But, in order to comply with Z133 it must cinch for the reasons that Laz pointed out.

I guess a bowline could be used if the eye were seized by lashings or maybe even stout bands like I put on with my lobster claw band tool.

An eye splice that's too loose won't comply either.

The issue is biner cross loading...solve it anyway you can.
 
I climb on splices most of the time now. I was taught the anchor hitch as an endline termination when I was learning. I use the yosemite bowline or anchor hitch when tying off the ladder snap. Scaffold/noose/fisherman knots have many uses...

I have never tied into a bowline for personal life support, many a mountaineer/rock climber/arborist has told me many reasons why not to. I figure mountaineers know what they are talking about.

Each of these knots are very useful in the right situations.
 
[ QUOTE ]


But, in order to comply with Z133 it must cinch for the reasons that Laz pointed out.



[/ QUOTE ]

That's the real issue here. I wouldn't worry about climbers falling out of the trees because they used a bowline, but we're trying to be compliant with the Z.
cool.gif


jp
grin.gif
 
What's the problem with a buntline hitch? I thought it is a secure knot. easy to do, easy to take out(as a lifeline).??
 
[ QUOTE ]
I remember when Arborplex first came out. Back in the early 80's. Correct me if I'm wrong there, But it was cheap, and up to standard in strength requirements. Though Arborplex is seriously springy line. Slack, loading, working, Arborplex is notorious for knots slacking, slipping and.... You have to really set the knot with that stuff.

The more supple ropes today don't have the springy tendency of arborplex and for it hold their knots far better.

The bowline is a superior knot that is quick and easy to tie. With the proper attention paid when setting the bowline it is a very safe termination knot.

However, no knot is idiot proof.

[/ QUOTE ]

My sentiments entirely Gerry; a stiffer braided line will quite easily work loose a knot.

It never ceases to amaze me how the blind dogma of some makes them believe that one size fits all for safety. There are many contributing factors to all tree work systems that help ensure safety.

Often it is trading one risk for a lesser evil, but a risk still remains, such is the nature of the multitude of complex tasks in our work.

Having been involved with writing national standards for training and assessing of skills for short courses, I appreciate that beyond basic skills at an introductory level, the scope is too wide - only a time served apprenticeship with time served masters will reveal the required knowledge. I still seek these people out. Gerry is one of them.

I no longer contribute to the national standards. They aren't working. Too much "my idea is the one that MUST be adopted".

We can still seek out the time served, philosophical, intuitive masters, if accepting the risks and choosing to undertake our own apprenticeship.

Never assume a mountaineer or anyone knows best -they often don't. Listen, look, learn. Think why? and What if? We are the masters of your own undertaking. We are the ones who may die by our own hands, or lack of risk assessment. Please just consider that the next time captain authority puts on his leotard and gets in your face - they haven't always thought things through properly.
 
[ QUOTE ]
My sentiments entirely Gerry; a stiffer braided line will quite easily work loose a knot.

It never ceases to amaze me how the blind dogma of some makes them believe that one size fits all for safety. There are many contributing factors to all tree work systems that help ensure safety.

Often it is trading one risk for a lesser evil, but a risk still remains, such is the nature of the multitude of complex tasks in our work.

Having been involved with writing national standards for training and assessing of skills for short courses, I appreciate that beyond basic skills at an introductory level, the scope is too wide - only a time served apprenticeship with time served masters will reveal the required knowledge. I still seek these people out. Gerry is one of them.

I no longer contribute to the national standards. They aren't working. Too much "my idea is the one that MUST be adopted".

We can still seek out the time served, philosophical, intuitive masters, if accepting the risks and choosing to undertake our own apprenticeship.

Never assume a mountaineer or anyone knows best -they often don't. Listen, look, learn. Think why? and What if? We are the masters of your own undertaking. We are the ones who may die by our own hands, or lack of risk assessment. Please just consider that the next time captain authority puts on his leotard and gets in your face - they haven't always thought things through properly.

[/ QUOTE ]

Excellent post Laz, makes me realise I was being blindly dogmatic. Just had to defend the Bowline as it seemed everyone else was consigning it to the scrapheap of arboriculture along with screwgate biners and the Petzl 'Stop'.
 
Laz, that was an excellent post! The dogma of the newly formed expert can be quite damaging to the learning process. When someone tells me "this is the ONLY way something must be done" it definitely gets my attention. This is not an industry where absolutes can be used very often, if at all. There are so many variables in any given situation that just accept the fact that you need to keep learning as much as possible to have the tools that are required.

All knots were developed for some purpose. Properly tied and used they will fulfill that purpose.

I still think the Bowline is the King of Knots.

Dave
 
[ QUOTE ]
I still think the Bowline is the King of Knots.



[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed, still the King in most applications but as a termination knot on a carabiner I think that the Bowline is a Joker
grin.gif


There have been discussions on rope rescue/mountaineering forums questioning the dogma of requiring a backup to a standard bowline. When people are asked about first hand experiences with a bowline inverting. There were no first hand stories which begs the question...Why? There are plenty of great reasons to add backups but mandating them for no sound reason gets cumbersome.
 
Standards need to protect the very inexperienced while allowing the very experienced to work efficiently and branch out and try new things. A difficult bit of wordsmithing. Not all those who ramble are lost.

When I first started to use the split tail system I used the bowline as a termination knot for my (steel) snap with 16 strand line. The line was new and supple, but the bowline made me a little uneasy and I did have it loosen up sometimes.

Of the newest lines, Blaze might hold a bowline very well, but Tachyon (aka Lava) is noticably stiffer and might not hold a bowline.

Maybe the question should be rephrased. Rather than asking 'Can a bowline be used as a termination knot?' the question should ask 'Does the bowline have any superior characteristics that would make it more desirable than any other termination knot or are there other, equally good substitutes for the bowline in that application?'


'Is there any need to use a bowline when there are so many other equally good substitutes as a termination knot?'
 
[ QUOTE ]
There are plenty of great reasons to add backups but mandating them for no sound reason gets cumbersome.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've never understood the reasoning behind the yosemite or stopper knot when applied to the bowline. The yosemite is lethal for obvious reasons which have been covered, Bermie gave a good summary earlier in this thread.

The stopper knot tied on the tail of the bowline is so useless it beggars belief why someone came up with it. If a bowline works itself loose then by the time the stopper knot reaches the main structure of the knot the gaps created will be big enough to allow the stopper knot to easily slip through. It also depends on wether the bowline works itself loose from the working or tail end of the knot.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Standards need to protect the very inexperienced while allowing the very experienced to work efficiently and branch out and try new things. A difficult bit of wordsmithing. Not all those who ramble are lost.

When I first started to use the split tail system I used the bowline as a termination knot for my (steel) snap with 16 strand line. The line was new and supple, but the bowline made me a little uneasy and I did have it loosen up sometimes.

Of the newest lines, Blaze might hold a bowline very well, but Tachyon (aka Lava) is noticably stiffer and might not hold a bowline.

Maybe the question should be rephrased. Rather than asking 'Can a bowline be used as a termination knot?' the question should ask 'Does the bowline have any superior characteristics that would make it more desirable than any other termination knot or are there other, equally good substitutes for the bowline in that application?'


'Is there any need to use a bowline when there are so many other equally good substitutes as a termination knot?'

[/ QUOTE ]

Excellent post Mahk. But I wouldn't say there are so many equally good substitutes. For instance - Is a buntline or anchor hitch safer than a bowline? For me the answer is no particularly when taught to apprentice climbers. Figure of eight on a bight? veery secure but very difficult to untie after being loaded, which is a nuisance if needing to untie in the tree often.

Scaffold? - probably the best/strongest/most secure option after a spliced eye.
 
[ QUOTE ]
I know of good reasons. They're good enough for me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your being very cryptic these days Laz.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom